Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Type:||Artigo de periódico|
|Title:||Pantoprazole versus ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcer: A multicenter study in Brazil|
|Abstract:||OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and tolerance of pantoprazole versus ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcers in the Brazilian population. METHODS: A total of 222 patients with active duodenal ulcers (DU) were randomly allocated to a double dummy blind treatment, either with ranitidine (RAN) 300 mg (111, aged from 20-68 yr old, 56 female) or with pantoprazole (PANT) 40 mg (111 patients, 18-70 yr old, 45 female). After a 2-wk course of treatment, each patient was clinically and endoscopically assessed for ulcer healing. Failure to heal required a further 2-wk course of treatment and a new evaluation thereafter. RESULTS: In all, 77 of the 103 patients in the PANT group (74.8%) and 42 of the 94 patients in the RAN group (44.7%) who completed the study had ulcer healing after one 2-wk treatment course, and an additional 23 in the PANT group (22.3%) and 28 in the RAN group (29.8%) after the second 2-wk treatment course, totaling 100 (97.1%) and 70 (74.5%), respectively. Therapeutic gain in favor of pantoprazole was significant both at the end of the first and the second 2-wk treatment course (p < 0.001). At 2 wk, symptoms remission was significantly higher in the PANT group (97.6%) than with the RAN group (77.5%) (p < 0.001). The Intention-to-treat analysis showed results statistically similar to those observed in the per-protocol analysis. Minor adverse events were reported by four patients in the PANT group and three in the RAN group. No relevant laboratory abnormalities were seen. No patient withdrew from the study due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that pantoprazole is more effective than ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcer providing faster ulcer healing in most patients (97.1%), in 4 wk. Adverse events were rare and were similar in both groups, and had no influence on the therapeutic outcome.|
|Editor:||Elsevier Science Inc|
|Appears in Collections:||Unicamp - Artigos e Outros Documentos|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.